Prof. Todor Cepreganov, Ph. D., INI

 RESEARCH POLICY IN MACEDONIAN HISTORIOGRAPHY AFTER 1990

             It is known that Macedonian historiography is relatively recent and of the same age with the Macedonian country, as well. Its task from its own formation was and it has still been  with its researches to find out and interpret the processes  the Macedonian people has passed through in its millennium existence on the Balkans, to discover its cultural and political inheritance, to release the fascist burden propaganda  giving its contribution of arising up, homogenization, of its Macedonian national consciousness. In this context the Macedonian historical science with its research has been invited to scientifically study and present, before the world both scientific and cultural sense  the creation of Macedonian nation and herewith to give its own contribution to affirmation of Macedonian national subjectivity and its substrate – the Macedonian state – the Republic of Macedonia.

Without  going into details, only one brief review of the Macedonian historiography development since formation of the Macedonian state up to falling of the Berlin wall may be noticed that at the same time along with forming of the personnel basis, the Macedonian view was also forming, the Macedonian historical doctrine in studying  the historical inheritance of Macedonian people and minorities in Macedonia, as well. The question is, was that necessary? Did the method to study and interpret of the historical inheritance itself have not arisen out of the nature and existence of the Macedonian country? As distinguished from  the other countries which has had its own formation in the end of XIX and beginning of XX century, as modern countries, and whose historiography could develop within the frameworks of those countries, in respect of Macedonian people there is a need to take the trauma into consideration of the Macedonian and national-revolutionary and liberating movement as well as the consequences from the impact of  the fascist propaganda as well as consequences as a result of denationalization and assimilation policy in the period between the two world Wars, the poor historical culture, necessities of the young generations education in the light of historical aspirations of  Macedonian people.  In such social-political-ideological matrix the Macedonian historiography found itself under pressure of policy. A basic characteristic of that pressure were the efforts of unilateral treatment of the historical past of Macedonian people. Researches  firstly were directed towards the last war occurrences, over-dimension of the workers’ and class movement, the communists‘ place in the historical development of Macedonian people. Both ideological and political requirements were put in the first plan. There was psychological pressure to a great number of Macedonian historians expressed in the phenomenon called auto-censorship. This was especially referring to the younger generation that was entering  very hard the political and ideological matrix. However, apart from this approach, within this period,  Macedonian historiography  made crucial steps in its development. It was not  immune to all-political turbulence occurred  in the period after 1945 until the fall of the Berlin wall. In this period,  Macedonian historiographers made a great number of researches in the neighboring Balkans  countries. First of all in Bulgaria and Serbia. Greece remained closed. In Albania, also,  the researches were put out of action. In West Europe the researches were mainly taking place  in France and Great Britain, with limited number of personnel.

            However, falling of the Berlin wall, that is, falling of one-minding and penetration of  pluralism as well as multi-parties in Macedonia appeared to occur  a process characterized with one huge flood of historical literature. The press and the mass media   were publishing articles, monographs, interviews with persons who, were liberated from tights of previous policy and ideology, appeared on first plan, although according to their vocations they were not historians. In other words, we had a history from the base, from the people. And again, Macedonian historiography found itself before a new politicization. One politicization and ideology was  changed with another. Judgements of the historians started, and/or there was an intention to disqualify the achieved results. Considerations for certain processes  which were quite explained and discussed were renowned. Historians-amateurs appeared who imposed one new politicization of Macedonian historiography. It was a politicization, which first of all,  had a party note. The auto-censorship stepped  again on the stage. In this period the historiographers, excluding small number, did not  enter into amateur arguments in the press and mass media. It was good if such approach to the history and interpretation of the events would be accepted , the question about the history itself as a science was endangered. Such euphoria was lasting several years and the issues started to come into their place. Unproved and uncultivated critical thought could not endure the pressure of the time. However, appeared to be that the history, without previous researches and discussed considerations, can only be an    improvisation, necessity to realize the political targets. In this period below stated questions were open, which appeared  in the center of historiography  interest and/or so-called “white spots” which in the period of the communism were  tabu themes.  This is referring, first of all, to the questions about shooting of persons after the end of the war without court proceedings, with omens of traitors or collaborators with the occupiers; persecuted persons for an idea of  sovereign  and independent Macedonia after the end of the war; the relation of the previous authority with the President of the Republic of Macedonia, Metodija Andonov-Cento who was accused for  betrayal and collaboration with the western countries; the historical views about the ancient Macedonians.

            In this period, in the foreground some processes appeared, events and persons who were neglected in that period in so-called Yugoslav historiography. Namely, in comparison with the previous period when mainly the common Yugoslav processes, events and persons as well as National Liberation War (NLW) were on the first place, after 1990 there has been  a need of appearing  Macedonisation of historiography. Special priority was given to the national-revolutionary period.  As we have said above, the political history dominates. Unfortunately, the Department existed in the Oral History Institute in the end of 1980-ies was repealed  as unnecessary. So in the moment in Macedonia, beside individual, there is no any institution dealing with the oral history. It is the very case with the social history, as well. The deficiency  of theoretically trained personnel regarding this problem unable  direct engagement in the analytical processes and it is not possible to expect world-verified results.

It can be said that Macedonian historiography today is recording  one permanent  rise in relation with the research. In this moment, Macedonian historians the major time of their  available time, are spending in researching  both in the  country and out of it. First of all, they are committed to researching themes which have not been enough researched in the Macedonian historiography. Firstly, researches are carrying out in Bulgaria where the greatest number of Macedonian historians stays. Furthermore, researches are carrying out in Serbia and Albania. Major attention is being committed to the researches in Great Britain, France, Germany and Austria. Macedonian historiographers have not been present on the American continent yet due to financial assets. Here is to be pointed out that one of the Macedonian historiographers’ deficiencies is the poor knowledge of foreign languages and theoretical incompetence meaning to enable usage of foreign scholarships and participation in projects with foreign partners.

            One small digression. Regardless of permanent five years ideological matrix, the Macedonian historical school has paid very small theoretical attention, which is a result of outlined strategy to find out the facts, first of all.  There is no need of running away from the truth that the fact in  Macedonian historiography has been taken too a level of cult. It can be concluded that Macedonian historiography, as a recent science  has taken approach from the older Balkan historiographers, which is deviated and has still deviated from the world tendencies. Due to selective-recognized approach to the analysis of certain occurrence and processes, in the previous period, the opportunity for globally analytical approach toward the history of Macedonia and Macedonian people has been missed.  Today, regarding  this issue we are having some progress. The trial in disciplinary approach is visible  in the research and analysis  of historical facts. First of all I think about the theoretical approach to explanation of the problems connected to development of the Macedonian nation.

            I would like to turn my attention to one phenomenon, which has specially been characteristic within the last years. Namely, besides our researches in the Balkan countries and wider are obviously quite weak or none at all the connections with the neighboring historiography. Perhaps you are witnesses yourselves that at the numerous number of Sessions at which Bulgarians, Greeks, Serbs and other historiographies  have been present, the Macedonians have been absent. Just one example: a conference about the Balkans Wars was held in Thessaloniki. Present Bulgaria, Greece, Serbia, Romania. Macedonia was not invited neither informed about that. There are such more examples. Regardless this is made with intention or not, it is a question that can be speculated with.  

            In the end I would like to turn my attention to the outlooks of  Macedonian historiography. According to that in the moment  that is happening, we cannot be great optimists in the view of the historiography development in Macedonia. When I am saying this, I think of the relation of the country towards the historiography. Still the country is financing the institutes dealing with the study of the history. The obtained assets are minimum. None is stimulated,  nowadays, in order to be interested in history. Furthermore, studying the classical and world languages, participation on the international scientific Sessions are not on enviable level. This destimulates the youngsters to devote themselves along the difficult path of the science.

Just only another moment particularly typical for Macedonia. All of you are familiar with the existence of a huge minority in the Republic of Macedonia. All of them by their own consideration show an interest about studying of their cultural and historical inheritance. Nothing disputable, and entirely natural. 

          However, the concerning issue  is that the basic characteristic of its studying and affirmation is very often completely opposed to that I would rather call it  Macedonian explanation of those same occurrences.  That imposed right here is the issue how to become conscious  and find out a method which would allow cultural and political inheritance both of the Macedonian nation and national minorities, created on the Macedonian land to be treated, studied and felt as cultural property to all of us. Undoubted this requires multi-sided and more serious elaboration. Only few questions arising out of it: how to represent the history of one minority who has own national country out of the country they are living in? How to represent that having a local color,  that which is connected to equality of the destiny, solidarity and mutual supporting in the environment and country living in? As a historian I am  not for applying cosmetics to the history in the name of some brotherhood and unity. It has been shown that such and similar models to it cannot endure the test of time. However, nowadays in Macedonia, regardless  we want to admit it or not, we have a situation of parallelism . And this makes sense of parallel entities. Or alternatively, conscious of oppositions and separatism. The differences in interpreting the historical inheritance, of such inherited values are great and different; not only for the thing having a special characteristics but also for those occurrences that are a part of the mutual past and struggle.  

            I would like to conclude that all of us interested in the historical science neglect the overloaded misinformation and to accept the reality, which is of great importance for stabilization and peace on the Balkan and Europe. I would like on this spot, to finish with the Erick Hosbaun’s words” I have always thought that the historical profession, regardless how much inconvenient, let me say, as a nuclear physics, cannot make any trouble. Now, I know it can. Our studies can be transformed into bombs factories as the workshops in which IRA have found out to process the chemical fertilizer into explosive.”

            Respected, the emotional explanation of the past and the traumas creating consciousness of hatred, revenge and national intolerance leads nowhere.   There is a need of one new approach making new realization, first of all, of mutual respect and tolerance, and afterward closeness. I am sure that  Macedonian historiography is interested in such a development. To us, the historians, the only concerned thing is to try, as much as we can, not to let the past be our future and repeat to us again.         

contents

board of editors

© Hi-story magazine, issue 1, June 2003; web-design: "Vertikala - Progressive Ideas and Technologies", Skopje